Back to Top

CLJ Bulletin, Issue 2017, Vol 3
19 January 2017


Print this page

Introduction:

To get the most out of this law bulletin join CLJ Law Online now - http://www.cljlaw.com/?page=subscription

Feel free to forward this to your colleagues. Get this bulletin as email by going to http://www.cljlaw.com/?page=bulletinsubscribe


New This Week

1. Case(s) of the Week

  1. MAT SHUHAIMI SHAFIEI v. KERAJAAN MALAYSIA [2017] 1 CLJ 404

2. Latest Cases

  1. Legal Network Series

  2. CLJ 2017 Volume 1 (Part 4)

3. Articles

  1. LNS Article(s)

  2. CLJ Article(s)

4. Legislation Highlights

  1. Principal Acts

  2. Amending Acts

  3. PU(A)

  4. PU(B)

  5. Legislation Alert


CASE(S) OF THE WEEK

MAT SHUHAIMI SHAFIEI v. KERAJAAN MALAYSIA [2017] 1 CLJ 404
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
LIM YEE LAN JCA, VARGHESE GEORGE JCA, HARMINDAR SINGH DHALIWAL JCA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: W-01(A)-115-04-2015]
25 NOVEMBER 2016
[2016] CLJ (JT13)

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Res judicata - Principles - Whether court could decline application if application leads to unjust result - Whether discretionary in nature - Whether same issues challenged in earlier proceedings

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Legislature - Constitutionality of statute - Sedition Act 1948 (`Act 15') - Application for declaration that s. 3 of Act 15 violated art. 10 of Federal Constitution - Exclusion of requirement to prove `intention' - Whether disproportionate inroad into fundamental right - Whether exclusion of requirement to prove intention was a deviation from norm with regards to criminal prosecutions - Whether s. 3(3) of Act 15 breached guarantee of equality under Federal Constitution - Whether s. 3(3) of Act 15 contravened art. 10 of Federal Constitution

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Fundamental liberties - Freedom of speech and expression - Sedition Act 1948 (`Act 15'), s. 3(3) - Application for declaration that s. 3(3) of Act 15 violated art. 10 of Federal Constitution - Whether violated citizen's right to freedom of speech and expression - Exclusion of requirement to prove `intention' - Whether s. 3(3) satisfied test of proportionality - Whether s. 3(3) in violation of constitutional rights of a citizen to be treated and protected equally before law


LATEST CASES

Legal Network Series

[2015] 1 LNS 540

LABUAN FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY v. EC TRUST (LABUAN) BHD

COMPANY LAW: Winding up - Opposition to petition - Admissibility of an affidavit in opposition purportedly affirmed by solicitor who had not been authorized by respondent company - Solicitor produced resolution from a sole director from across bar table - Right to object to petition - Whether affidavit in opposition admissible - Whether mere existence of notice of intention to appear could give a person the right to object or support a winding up petition

COMPANY LAW: Winding up - Just and equitable grounds - Company carrying on trust business - Complete failure of substratum of company - Company committed various breaches of law and had been dormant for more than a year since its trust company licence was revoked - Whether petitioner had valid ground to present petition - Whether sufficient to invoke just and equitable limb

COMPANY LAW: Winding up - Inability to pay debts - Debts owed to investors of company - Investors being a creditor who supported winding up petition - Debt owed to supporting creditors exceeded net assets of company - Whether sufficient ground existed to justify granting of winding up order

[2015] 1 LNS 554

KANG HOCK HIN v. TAN BON KIAT & ANOR

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Setting aside - Judgment in default - Plaintiff's application to set aside judgment in default of defence to counterclaim - Allegation of non-compliance with r. 56 of Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978 ('LPR') in giving seven day notice of intention to enter judgment in default - Whether breach of r. 56 of LPR per se could render judgment in default of defence an irregular judgment

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Setting aside - Judgment in default - Plaintiff's application to set aside judgment in default of defence to counterclaim - Judgment in default of defence was obtained against plaintiff due to fault of plaintiff's solicitor - Defence of merit - Dispute as to basis of amount claimed - Whether judgment in default was regularly obtained - Whether plaintiff should be punished for mistake of solicitor - Whether defence of merit raised - Whether issues raised need to be tried

[2015] 1 LNS 555

AFFIN BANK BERHAD v. MILLENNIUM WOOD SDN BHD & ORS

BANKING: Banker and customer - Breach of agreement - Failure to service monthly instalment payment - Bank's action to recover total outstanding sum - Action against principal debtor and guarantors - Allegation of absence of certificate of indebtedness - Failure to dispute or challenge notice of demand - Whether letter of recall of facilities issued was itself a certificate of indebtedness - Whether defendants were precluded from challenging accuracy of sum claimed by plaintiff - Whether mere pointing out of difference in sum sufficed to prove manifest error

BANKING: Guarantee and indemnity - Liability of guarantor - On demand guarantee - Continuing guarantee - Notice of demand had been issued to guarantors - Whether banker had complied with legal requirement to trigger guarantor's liabilities

[2015] 1 LNS 603

PP v. MAZLAN SENAPI

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Appeal against discharge and acquittal - Trial judge held prosecution failed to prove prima facie case at end of prosecution case - Offence under ss. 16(a)(B) and 17(a) of Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 - Prosecution failed to prove element that gratification accepted was for accused himself - Existence of doubt on identity of person who solicited and accepted gratification - Whether prosecution's evidence ran counter to its own case - Whether prosecution's evidence created a serious doubt in proving elements of offence

[2015] 1 LNS 1201

KHOO KHEE CHEONG lwn. CHEN AH MENG & YANG LAIN

PROSEDUR SIVIL: Injunksi - Injunksi Erinford - Permohonan injunksi Erinford sementara menunggu pelupusan rayuan - Rayuan berkenaan penolakan relief injunksi dan deklarasi oleh mahkamah - Permohonan injunksi oleh pemegang saham majoriti untuk menghalang pemegang saham lain dan syarikat dari melaksanakan usul-usul mesyuarat lembaga pengarah - Dakwaan usul-usul mesyuarat jika dilaksanakan akan memprejudiskan hak plaintif - Kekhuatiran plaintif berkenaan pulangan yang adil dan berpatutan atas pemegangan sahamnya di dalam syarikat - Dakwaan berdasarkan spekulasi - Sama ada terdapat isu-isu bona fide untuk dibicarakan - Sama ada ganti rugi adalah remedi yang memadai - Sama ada pemberian injunksi Erinford akan menjejaskan perjalanan syarikat


CLJ 2017 Volume 1 (Part 4)

COURT OF APPEAL

Kamdar Sdn Bhd v. Bipinchandra Balvantrai & Ors
Alizatul Khair Osman, Nallini Pathmanathan, Zabariah Mohd Yusof JJCA
(Contract; Civil Procedure - Breach - Duties - Failure to consider pleaded case - Whether plaintiff accorded reasonable opportunity to be heard) [2017] 1 CLJ 369 [CA]

Mat Shuhaimi Shafiei v. Kerajaan Malaysia
Lim Yee Lan, Varghese George, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal JJCA
(Civil Procedure; Constitutional Law - Res judicata - Whether same issues challenged in earlier proceedings - Legislature - Constitutionality of statute - Whether s. 3(3) of Sedition Act 1948 contravenes art. 10 of Federal Constitution - Fundamental liberties) [2017] 1 CLJ 404 [CA]

Saied Safarigharigh lwn. PP
Rohana Yusuf, Ahmadi Asnawi, Abdul Rahman Sebli HHMR
(Mahkamah - Mahkamah Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap pembebasan - Bidang kuasa Mahkamah Rayuan) [2017] 1 CLJ 426 [CA]

TTDI Jaya Sdn Bhd v. Yew Hong Teng & Anor
Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Prasad Sandosham Abraham, Asmabi Mohamad JJCA
(Contract - Sale and purchase agreement - Whether vacant possession delivered - Whether there was total failure of consideration - Whether rescission of sale and purchase agreement appropriate remedy) [2017] 1 CLJ 436 [CA]

HIGH COURT

Danh Coi & Ors v. PP
Lee Heng Cheong J
(Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure; Fisheries - Convictions under s. 15(1)(a) of Fisheries Act 1985 - Guilty plea - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Whether convicted person could appeal against conviction after pleading guilty - Whether vessels and other appurtenances liable to forfeiture - Powers of Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency) [2017] 1 CLJ 464 [HC]

Liew Ju Min v. Choo Wee Poh & Anor
Lim Chong Fong JC
(Civil Procedure - Striking out - Originating summons - Whether prematurely filed) [2017] 1 CLJ 474 [HC]

SUBJECT INDEX

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Action - Cause of action - Breach of fiduciary duties - Misappropriation of monies - Allegation of - Failure to consider pleaded case - Whether affected trial judge's approach to case before considering evidential record - Whether monies unlawfully utilised - Whether undue weight placed on hearsay ledger entries - Failure to refer or evaluate underlying documents - Whether there was examination on element of breach of trust, fiduciary duty or directors' duties - Whether doctrine of laches applied - Whether plaintiff accorded reasonable opportunity to be heard in full - Whether there was breach of natural justice in hearing of suit
Kamdar Sdn Bhd v. Bipinchandra Balvantrai & Ors
(Alizatul Khair Osman, Nallini Pathmanathan, Zabariah Mohd Yusof JJCA) [2017] 1 CLJ 369 [CA]

Res judicata - Principles - Whether court could decline application if application leads to unjust result - Whether discretionary in nature - Whether same issues challenged in earlier proceedings
Mat Shuhaimi Shafiei v. Kerajaan Malaysia
(Lim Yee Lan, Varghese George, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal JJCA) [2017] 1 CLJ 369 [CA]

Striking out - Originating summons ('OS') - Non compos mentis - Mental Health Act 2001 - Appointment committee of person and estate of person - Application to strike out OS - Grounds to strike out - Whether leave of court obtained pursuant to O. 76 Rules of Court 2012 ('ROC') prior to filing of OS - Whether defendants wrongly named in OS - Whether OS prematurely filed without prior inquiry under s. 53(1) of Mental Health Act 2001 - Whether persons under disability and mentally disordered parties to OS - Whether OS ought to be struck out
Liew Ju Min v. Choo Wee Poh & Anor
(Lim Chong Fong JC) [2017] 1 CLJ 474 [HC]

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Fundamental liberties - Freedom of speech and expression - Sedition Act 1948 ('Act 15'), s. 3(3) - Application for declaration that s. 3(3) of Act 15 violated art. 10 of Federal Constitution - Whether violated citizen's right to freedom of speech and expression - Exclusion of requirement to prove 'intention' - Whether s. 3(3) satisfied test of proportionality - Whether s. 3(3) in violation of constitutional rights of a citizen to be treated and protected equally before law
Mat Shuhaimi Shafiei v. Kerajaan Malaysia
(Lim Yee Lan, Varghese George, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal JJCA) [2017] 1 CLJ 404 [CA]

Legislature - Constitutionality of statute - Sedition Act 1948 ('Act 15') - Application for declaration that s. 3 of Act 15 violated art. 10 of Federal Constitution - Exclusion of requirement to prove 'intention' - Whether disproportionate inroad into fundamental right - Whether exclusion of requirement to prove intention was a deviation from norm with regards to criminal prosecutions - Whether s. 3(3) of Act 15 breached guarantee of equality under Federal Constitution - Whether s. 3(3) of Act 15 contravened art. 10 of Federal Constitution
Mat Shuhaimi Shafiei v. Kerajaan Malaysia
(Lim Yee Lan, Varghese George, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal JJCA) [2017] 1 CLJ 404 [CA]

CONTRACT

Agreement - Sale and purchase agreement - Vacant possession - Purchasers accepted vacant possession despite defects found on property - Purchasers submitted complaint form in response to notice of delivery of vacant possession issued by developer - Purchasers claimed for rescission of sale and purchase agreement five years later based on allegation that developer failed to complete and deliver vacant possession - Whether claim supported by evidence - Whether vacant possession delivered - Whether there was total failure of consideration - Whether rescission of sale and purchase agreement appropriate remedy
TTDI Jaya Sdn Bhd v. Yew Hong Teng & Anor
(Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Prasad Sandosham Abraham, Asmabi Mohamad JJCA) [2017] 1 CLJ 436 [CA]

Breach - Duties - Misappropriation of monies - Failure to consider pleaded case - Whether affected trial judge's approach to case before considering evidential record - Whether monies unlawfully utilised - Whether undue weight placed on hearsay ledger entries - Failure to refer or evaluate underlying documents - Whether there was examination on element of breach of trust, fiduciary duty or directors' duties - Whether doctrine of laches applied - Whether plaintiff accorded reasonable opportunity to be heard in full - Whether there was breach of natural justice in hearing of suit
Kamdar Sdn Bhd v. Bipinchandra Balvantrai & Ors
(Alizatul Khair Osman, Nallini Pathmanathan, Zabariah Mohd Yusof JJCA) [2017] 1 CLJ 369 [CA]

CRIMINAL LAW

Offences - Fisheries - Convictions under s. 15(1)(a) of Fisheries Act 1985 - Guilty plea - Whether accused persons understood charges and consequences of pleading guilty - Whether convictions and sentences passed by trial judge proper - Whether within ambit of s. 25 of Fisheries Act 1985 - Criminal Procedure Code, s. 173(a) & (b)
Danh Coi & Ors v. PP
(Lee Heng Cheong J) [2017] 1 CLJ 464 [HC]

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Appeal - Appeal against conviction - Guilty plea - Whether convicted person could appeal against conviction after pleading guilty - Whether appeal limited to extent or legality of sentence - Whether appeal against conviction was incompetent - Criminal Procedure Code, s. 305
Danh Coi & Ors v. PP
(Lee Heng Cheong J) [2017] 1 CLJ 464 [HC]

Appeal - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Convictions under s. 15(1)(a) of Fisheries Act 1985 - Guilty plea - Whether accused persons understood charges and consequences of pleading guilty - Whether trial judge complied with s. 173(a) and (b) of Criminal Procedure Code - Whether convictions and sentences passed by trial judge proper - Whether within ambit of s. 25 of Fisheries Act 1985
Danh Coi & Ors v. PP
(Lee Heng Cheong J) [2017] 1 CLJ 464 [HC]

Forfeiture - Fisheries offence - Order of forfeiture and disposal of vessels and exhibits - Appeal against order - Whether vessels used in commission of offences under s. 15(1)(a) of Fisheries Act 1985 - Whether vessels and other appurtenances liable to forfeiture under s. 52 - Whether forfeiture order proper
Danh Coi & Ors v. PP
(Lee Heng Cheong J) [2017] 1 CLJ 464 [HC]

FISHERIES

Enforcement - Procedure - Powers of Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency ('MMEA') - Whether MMEA has all powers which relevant agency may exercise under any Federal Law in Malaysian Maritime Zone - Whether ranks of MMEA equivalent with Federal Authorities specified in or under any other written law - Whether MMEA empowered to investigate cases and offences under Fisheries Act 1985 - Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency Act 2004, ss. 2, 3, 5, 6(1), 7(1), (2) & (3)
Danh Coi & Ors v. PP
(Lee Heng Cheong J) [2017] 1 CLJ 464 [HC]

INDEKS PERKARA

MAHKAMAH

Mahkamah Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap pembebasan - Bidang kuasa Mahkamah Rayuan - Sama ada Mahkamah Rayuan boleh mengeluarkan waran mengarahkan tertuduh direman sementara menunggu pelupusan rayuan - Tertuduh warganegara asing - Sama ada tertuduh berpeluang menghilangkan diri jika dibebaskan dengan ikat jamin - Sama ada integriti rayuan pihak pendakwaan terjejas jika pemohon dilepaskan - Akta Mahkamah Kehakiman 1964, s. 56A
Saied Safarigharigh lwn. PP
(Rohana Yusuf, Ahmadi Asnawi, Abdul Rahman Sebli HHMR) [2017] 1 CLJ 426 [CA]


ARTICLES

LNS Article(s)

  1. ANIMAL LAW IN AUSTRALIA*
    Legalised cruelty and why we should care
    [Read excerpt]
    by: MIKE ROSALKY** [2017] 1 LNS(A) v

  2. [2017] 1 LNS(A) v
    logo
    AUSTRALIA

    ANIMAL LAW IN AUSTRALIA*
    Legalised cruelty and why we should care

    by
    MIKE ROSALKY**

    Animal law is a rapidly growing area of study. It was first taught at UNSW in 2005, and is now taught, or proposed to be taught, in 14 Australian law schools. An increasing number of legal practitioners are passionately pursuing this practice area as they learn about the cruel way many animals are legally able to be treated in Australia.

    What is animal law?

    Animal law is the field of law that governs interactions between humans and non-human animals. It can broadly be divided into two categories: laws that deal with animals and laws that purport to protect animals. For the purpose of this article, I will focus on laws that purport to protect animals (anti-cruelty laws). These laws exist primarily at the State and Territory level.

    The Animal Welfare Act 1992 is the ACT’s primary anti-cruelty law. It prohibits a number of cruel practices such as debeaking hens and keeping farmed animals in sow stalls, farrowing crates or battery cages. The ACT Government should be commended as the only jurisdiction in Australia to have banned such practices. However, most animal products sold in the ACT have come from animals outside the Territory, who endured legalised cruelty during their lives or at slaughter or both.

    . . .

    * Published with kind permission of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory. See Ethos No. 241 September 2016.

    ** Animal Defenders Office


    Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
  3. MONEY LAUNDERING: AN APPRAISAL OF THE PROCESSES,
    TRENDS AND IMPACTS ON NIGERIA AS AN EMERGING ECONOMY
    [Read excerpt]
    by: NASIRU MUKHTAR*
    DR. YUSUF I.A.**
    [2017] 1 LNS(A) vi

  4. [2017] 1 LNS(A) vi
    logo
    NIGERIA

    MONEY LAUNDERING: AN APPRAISAL OF THE PROCESSES,
    TRENDS AND IMPACTS ON NIGERIA AS AN EMERGING ECONOMY

    by
    NASIRU MUKHTAR*
    DR. YUSUF I.A.**

    Abstract

    Money laundering has continued to be an issue of global concern because of its adverse impact on the economy of nation states and its being a threat to the survival of the financial system of both developed and developing countries. Money laundering activities by its nature undermines economic and social development of nations. For this reason, international cooperation among nations becomes necessary. To effectively combat money laundering, it is important to understand the nature of the offence and the various predicates that precipitates its commission. Nigeria has demonstrated commitment to combat the adverse effects of money laundering through legislative and enforcement framework and her compliance with international treaties, conventions and best practices. In spite of that, the Nigerian economy is down sliding in recent times as a result of problems ranging from treasury looting and laundering of national resources by few Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs) and their cronies. Against the above background, this paper argues that the Nigerian economy, as an emerging economy, is suffering from the adverse impact of money laundering resulting in a weak financial system, poor banking supervision, ineffective law enforcement drives, therefore making the economic policy and implementation guidelines more susceptible to distortion from the activities of the money launderers. The paper also appraises the nature, stages and trends of money laundering and its impact on emerging economies using Nigeria as a case study. The paper concludes that the Nigerian economy is not likely to revive until the various money laundering related activities are addressed and thus recommends a further strengthening of the Nigerian money laundering legislative regime and enforcement procedure to adequately address its devastating impact on the Nigerian economy.

    KEY WORDS:  Money Laundering, Emerging Economies, Economic Impacts, Corruption, Financial Institutions, Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs)

    . . .

    * Nasiru Mukhtar - Department of Private & Islamic Law, Faculty of Law, University of Abuja- Nigeria.

    ** Dr. Yusuf, I.A. - Department of Public Law, University of Ilorin, Ilorin-Nigeria.


    Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

CLJ Article(s)

  1. ARE INSURERS LIABLE IF AN EMPLOYEE OF THE INSURED OR THE
    AUTHORISED DRIVER IS INJURED OR DIES IN AN ACCIDENT
    WHILST TRAVELLING AS A PASSENGER IN THE INSURED MOTOR
    VEHICLE IN THE COURSE OF HIS EMPLOYMENT?
    [Read excerpt]
    by: S SANTHANA DASS [2017] 1 CLJ(A) xi

  2. [2017] 1 CLJ(A) xi
    logo
    MALAYSIA

    ARE INSURERS LIABLE IF AN EMPLOYEE OF THE INSURED OR THE
    AUTHORISED DRIVER IS INJURED OR DIES IN AN ACCIDENT
    WHILST TRAVELLING AS A PASSENGER IN THE INSURED MOTOR
    VEHICLE IN THE COURSE OF HIS EMPLOYMENT?

    by
    S SANTHANA DASS

    There seems to be confusion as to whether insurers are liable if an employee of the insured or the authorised driver is injured or dies in an accident whilst travelling as a passenger in the insured motor vehicle in the course of his employment.

    Section B of the motor policy reads as follows:

    Section B - Liability to Third Parties

    1. We will pay the amount which You or Your Authorised Driver are legally liable to pay (including claimant's costs and expenses) for accidents caused by or arising out of the use of Your Vehicle or in connection with the loading or unloading therefrom for:

    (a) death or bodily injury to any person except those specifically excluded under Exceptions to Section B

    Exceptions to Section B

    We will not pay for

    (i) ...

    (ii) death or bodily injury to any person where such death or bodily injury arises out of and in the course of the employment of such person by You or Your authorised driver;

    (iii) ...

    (iv) liability to any person being carried in or upon or entering or getting on to or alighting from Your Car (unless he/she is required to be carried in or on Your Car by reason of or in pursuance of his contract of employment with You and/or Your Authorised Driver and/or his/her employer)

    . . .


    Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS

Principal Acts

Number Title In force from Repealing
ACT 786 Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Act 2017 This Act comes into operation on the date the Agreement comes into operation for the Government of Malaysia pursuant to Article 58 of the Agreement -
ACT 785 Finance Act 2017 The Income Tax Act 1967 [Act 53] see s 3; The Petroleum (Income Tax) Act 1967 [Act 543] see s 30; The Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 [Act 169] see s 34; The Labuan Business Activity Tax Act 1990 [Act 445] see s 37; The Goods and Services Tax Act 2014 [Act 762] see s 40 -
ACT 784 Scouts Association of Malaysia (Incorporation) Act 1968 (Revised 2016) 17 November 2016 pursuant to paragraph 6(1)(xxiii) of the Revision of Laws Act 1968 [Act 1]; Revised up to 1 November 2016; First enacted in 1968 as Act of Parliament No 38 of 1968; First Revision - 1989 (Act 409 wef 14 December 1989) -
ACT 783 Statutory Declarations Act 1960 (Revised 2016) 17 November 2016 pursuant to paragraph 6(1)(xxiii) of the Revision of Laws Act 1968 [Act 1]; Revised up to 1 November 2016; First enacted in 1960 as Act No 20 of 1960; First Revision - 1969 (Act No 13 wef 14 April 1970) -
ACT 782 Forest Research Institute Malaysia Act 2016 1 October 2016 -

Amending Acts

Number Title In force from Principal/Amending Act No
ACT A1523 Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) (Amendment) Act 2017 Not Yet In Force ACT 505
ACT A1522 Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act 2017 Not Yet In Force ACT 172
ACT A1521 Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Act 2016 Not Yet In Force ACT 593
ACT A1520 Supply Act 2017 23 December 2016  
ACT A1519 Merchant Shipping Ordinance (Amendment) Act 2016 Not Yet In Force ORD 70/1952

PU(A)

Number Title Date of Publication In force from Principal/ Amending Act No
PU(A) 16/2017 Customs Duties (Exemption) (Amendment) Order 2017 17 January 2017 31 January 2017 PU(A) 371/2013
PU(A) 15/2017 Pembangunan Sumber Manusia Berhad (Registration of Employers and Payment of Levy) (Amendment) Regulations 2017 10 January 2017 16 January 2017 PU(A) 141/2001
PU(A) 14/2017 Education (Teachers Provident Fund Rules 1962) (Revocation) Regulations 2017 10 January 2017 16 January 2017 ACT 550
PU(A) 13/2017 Education (Teachers Provident Fund) (Winding Up) Order 2017 10 January 2017 16 January 2017 ACT 550
PU(A) 12/2017 Factories and Machinery (Exemption To Petronas Chemicals Ammonia Sdn. Bhd., Kerteh, Terengganu) Order 2017 10 January 2017 11 January 2017 ACT 139

PU(B)

Number Title Date of Publication In force from Principal/ Amending Act No
PU(B) 28/2017 Revocation of Reservation of Land For Public Purpose For Lot 1571 Mukim Kuala Lumpur 17 January 2017 18 January 2017 ACT 56/1965
PU(B) 27/2017 Revocation of Reservation of Land For Public Purpose For Lot 7 Bandar Kuala Lumpur 17 January 2017 18 January 2017 ACT 56/1965
PU(B) 26/2017 Revocation of Reservation of Land For Public Purpose For Lot 56186 Mukim Batu 17 January 2017 18 January 2017 ACT 56/1965
PU(B) 25/2017 Revocation of Reservation of Land For Public Purpose For Lot 4953 Mukim Hulu Kelang 17 January 2017 18 January 2017 ACT 56/1965
PU(B) 24/2017 Appointment of Deputy Public Prosecutor 17 January 2017 Specified in column (2) of the Schedule ACT 593

Legislation Alert

Updated

Act/Principal No. Title Amended by In force from Section amended
ACT 543 Petroleum (Income Tax) Act 1967 (Revised 1995) ACT 785 The Income Tax Act 1967 [Act 53] see s. 3; The Petroleum (Income Tax) Act 1967 [Act 543] see s. 30; The Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 [Act 169] see s. 34; The Labuan Business Activity Tax Act 1990 [Act 445] see s. 37; The Goods and Services Tax Act 2014 [Act 762] see s. 40 Sections 2, 41A and 66A
ACT 53 Income Tax Act 1967 (Revised 1971) ACT 785 The Income Tax Act 1967 [Act 53] see s. 3; The Petroleum (Income Tax) Act 1967 [Act 543] see s. 30; The Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 [Act 169] see s. 34; The Labuan Business Activity Tax Act 1990 [Act 445] see s. 37; The Goods and Services Tax Act 2014 [Act 762] see s. 40 Sections 2, 13, 15A, 34, 44, 45A, 46, 47, 60, 60AA, 61A, 63A, 63B, 63C, 97A, 107C, 109C, 110C, 112A, 113A, 119B, 131A, 154, Schedule 1, Schedule 3 and Schedule 6
PU(A) 190/2014 Goods and Services Tax Regulations 2014 PU(A) 368/2016 1 January 2017 Regulations 39, 40, 42, 46, 47, 59, 60, 62, 82 and 84; First Schedule, Second Schedule and Fourth Schedule
PU(A) 273/2014 Goods and Services Tax (Relief) Order 2014 PU(A) 369/2016 1 January 2017 Paragraph 6; First Schedule, Second Schedule and Third Schedule
ACT 762 Goods and Services Tax Act 2014 ACT 785 The Income Tax Act 1967 [Act 53] see s. 3; The Petroleum (Income Tax) Act 1967 [Act 543] see s. 30; The Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 [Act 169] see s. 34; The Labuan Business Activity Tax Act 1990 [Act 445] see s. 37; The Goods and Services Tax Act 2014 [Act 762] see s. 40 Sections 2, 13, 20, 33, 34A, 34B, 41, 42, 49, 51, 56, 57, 70, 72, 73, 103, 156, 160, 161, 162, 162A, 162B, 163 and Second Schedule

Revoked

Act/Principal No. Title Revoked by In force from
PU(B) 27/2015 Appointment and Revocation of Appointment of Registrar of Credit Reporting Agencies PU(B) 463/2016 16 March 2016
PU(A) 61/2010 Federal Roads (Private Management) (Collection of Tolls) (Kajang-Seremban Highway) Order 2010 PU(A) 264/2016 19 October 2016
PU(A) 79/2002 Communications and Multimedia (Rates) Rules 2002 PU(A) 185/2016 1 July 2016
PU(A) 196/2003 Market (Federal Territory of Putrajaya) By-Laws 2003 PU(A) 254/2016 11 October 2016
PU(B) 99/2014 Notice of Affirmative Final Determination of An Anti-Dumping Duty Investigation With Respect to Imports of Cellulose Fibre Reinforced Cement Flat and Pattern Sheets Originating Or Exported From the Kingdom of Thailand PU(B) 401/2016 8 September 2016